[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: No Subject




Eric,
I agree with you that birds should be removed as a separate class, creating a paraphyletic Reptilia. If strict cladists want to combine them to achieve holophyly, that's okay too (after all, I do this informally by including a marker for birds in the reptile classification).
However, among the many different concepts and classifications of Insectivora over the years, almost all of them have been polyphyletic. Removing tenrecs (or any other "insectivorous" group) to eliminate polyphyly is a totally different matter. Noone (cladist or eclecticist) wants polyphyletic groups.
"Insectivora" is almost as confusing as "Herbivora" would be. The only reason Carnivora is okay is because a lot of unrelated groups have not been put into it. There are carnivorous marsupials, but they are so clearly "unrelated" to eutherian Carnivora, that the later has never been treated like a wastebasket the way "Insectivora" has.
-------Ken Kinman
********************************************************
From: ELurio@aol.com
Reply-To: ELurio@aol.com
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: No Subject
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 20:15:04 EDT


When I asked why it was decided to change the name of insectavora,

qilongia@yahoo.com writes:

<< Because Insectivora includes tenrecs, which are
being excluded...>>

When I objected to Birds being described as still being reptiles, I got
slammed. BTW, insectavores are monophylitic at least as around the area
around the KT Boundry....

eric l.

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.